On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 at 04:19, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
On 12/17/18 5:47 PM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 01:34, Jeremy White
<jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
We punted on the question of where to have the
next Wineconf. Two
candidates we considered were Japan and Toronto.
I've asked folks at Valve if they would be willing to present at the
next conference, and the answer was positive for Toronto, and less
enthusiastic for Japan. Ulrich has been patiently offering to host for
many years, and I think it would be good to rotate back to North America
on it's scheduled year.
Just so there's no misunderstanding, "we" above is "the Wine
Project
Leadership committee", as opposed to "CodeWeavers", right?
It was not intended to be a 'We' as in CodeWeavers, but I meant it more
as a 'We the gathered Wine community'.
We've never really had a formal process for deciding things like next
conference location; it tends to be more of an ad hoc consensus. And
while the committee holds the power to fund the event, it does not
generally take a role in determining it's location. That is, it does
not act like a board of directors would and make decisions like this.
The committee really limits itself to funding decisions.
Since it's been a while since we've had a "Governance"
discussion, I
would be curious to learn the opinions of the other people on this
list if I were to suggest that perhaps it would be healthy for Wine if
the committee did play a more active role in decisions like these.
Building a consensus is of course great, but that's not the same as
making a decision—decisions are ultimately made by individuals. I also
think it would be fair towards potential hosts if the WineConf process
was fairly transparent.
I would like
it to be clear that this reply is as a member of the Wine
project, as opposed to a CodeWeavers contractor. At the same time,
since apparently Valve's willingness to attend in Canada, but not in
Japan was a consideration, I think it's only fair to point out that
CodeWeavers also has significant customers in Japan. Were they asked
as well?
No. But I think Valve's use of Wine is a particularly interesting story.
Certainly. Much of which would be under NDA though?
The other point is that I felt I got a similar
reaction from a number of
people when we did discuss Asia; that they would come to North America,
but not Asia. My feeling is that there is a small group of people that
are very passionate for the idea, and then a lot of indifferent people,
and a small number that would not come if it was in Asia. Anyone saying
they will not come to the conference tends to affect me, perhaps in a
disproportionate way.
Was that at WineConf, by any chance? I think it's fair to point out
that that would exclude asking people that would not attend in Europe
or the US. And of course, I think it would be somewhat optimistic to
expect the same kind of attendance as in e.g. Europe; much of the
point would trying to make that grow over the next few years.
Pitchforks and torches go here.
Although I'm confident Ulrich would make a great host, I don't think
anyone would be terribly surprised to learn I'd be a little
disappointed if WineConf 2019 wouldn't be in Asia.
Just to speak to my thinking a bit further. My feeling was that if we
telegraphed the move to Asia for a longer period that we would increase
the odds of having more people attend. I would also like to have an
actual host - someone that lives in Asia who is willing to volunteer -
so that we have someone who can coordinate the event. My hope was that
we could start that ask now, and have them stand up and advocate for
their site at this years conference.
But the point of the email was to provoke a conversation, so thank you
for that.
Well, I try :D
I do get the impression though that most people either really don't
care, or don't feel like their opinion would make a difference, so at
the very least I'll give you that.
Henri